8 research outputs found
Equivalence and noninferiority trials – are they viable alternatives for registration of new drugs? (III)
The scientific community's reliance on active-controlled trials is steadily increasing, as widespread agreement emerges concerning the role of these trials as viable alternatives to placebo trials. These trials present substantial challenges with regard to design and interpretation as their complexity increases, and the potential need for larger sample sizes impacts the cost and time variables of the drug development process. The potential efficacy and safety benefits derived from these trials may never be demonstrated by other methods. Active-controlled trials can develop valuable data to inform both prescribers and patients about the dose- and time-dependent actions of any new drug and can contribute to the management and communication of risks associated with the relevant therapeutic products
A Note on Therapeutic Equivalence and Therapeutic Ratio with Application to Studies in Respiratory Diseases
Free versus Fixed Combination Antihypertensive Therapy for Essential Arterial Hypertension: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Adaptive two-treatment two-period crossover design for binary treatment responses incorporating carry-over effects
Asymptotic power, Conditional test, Ethics, Limiting proportion of allocation, Maximum likelihood estimates, Play-the-winner rule, Randomized clinical trials, Randomized play-the-winner rule, Repeated measurement designs,
What Have We Learned about Trial Design From NIMH-Funded Pragmatic Trials?
At the 2008 annual meeting of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology (ACNP), a symposium was devoted to the following question: ‘what have we learned about the design of pragmatic clinical trials (PCTs) from the recent costly long-term, large-scale trials of psychiatric treatments?' in order to inform the design of future trials. In all, 10 recommendations were generated placing emphasis on (1) appropriate conduct of pragmatic trials; (2) clinical, rather than, merely statistical significance; (3) sampling from the population clinicians are called upon to treat; (4) clinical outcomes of patients, rather than, on outcome measures; (5) use of stratification, controlling, or adjusting when necessary and not otherwise; (6) appropriate consideration of site differences in multisite studies; (7) encouragement of ‘post hoc' exploration to generate (not test) hypotheses; (8) precise articulation of the treatment strategy to be tested and use of the corresponding appropriate design; (9) expanded opportunity for training of researchers and reviewers in RCT principles; and (10) greater emphasis on data sharing